'Beyond text': exploring ethos and method in co-producing research with communities

Abstract

There is a critique of research conducted in communities which fails to include communities in its design and undertaking. In parallel, academic research is increasingly being measured according to its benefit to the wider society. Co-productive research is a response to these challenges which offers a way of recognizing the resource contribution of communities to research and emphasizing the conduct of research 'with' communities rather than 'on' communities. This article identifies the reliance on 'text' in the research process as a barrier to delivering meaningful co-productive research with communities. 'Beyond-text' tools are emerging across academic disciplines and include story-telling, performance, art and photography. Recent research emphasizes the empowering potential of these methods by facilitating greater reflection on the lived experience of those involved. This article looks at examples of research which have employed 'beyond text' methods to consider their potential to deliver co-produced research with communities. It also asks whether it is the application of specific technical approaches and methods, or the underlying ethos within which research is conducted that is most critical to challenging unequal power relationships. It argues that beyond-text methods need to be applied within a wider set of values which re-conceptualize the role of the researcher working with communities.

Investigating Community Perspectives on Falls Prevention Information Seeking and Delivery: Older Person Perceptions Regarding Preferences for Falls Prevention Education Using a World Cafe Approach

“…World cafe approach is a community participatory research approach which has previously been particularly successful in engaging with hard to reach groups such as the elderly, disadvantaged and stigmatised groups living within the community (Aldred, 2011;Emlet & Moceri, 2011;Fouché & Light, 2011). It is maintained that the use of a less formal, cafe style atmosphere better encourages those marginalised populations to have a voice in terms of health and related social issues (Beebeejaun, Durose, Rees, Richardson, & Richardson, 2014;Ritch & Brennan, 2010) .…”

Go home?: The politics of immigration controversies

“…For the end-of-project event, we set ourselves a task of fi nding ways to include people most affected by the anti-immigration campaigns. The conference placed 'beyondtext' methods ( Spencer, 2011 ;Beebeejaum et al, 2014 ) -such as fi lm-and performance-based provocations -alongside text-laden presentations, and it privileged participant dialogue over 'talking heads'. For us, the conference was as much about creating spaces for engagement and creative exploration as it was about problematising established forms of dissemination that can silence voices and knowledge outside the confi nes of academia.…”

Co-production and the third sector: A comparative study of England and France

“…One of the divisions in co-production theory is the focus on what is being co-produced, or what exactly participants are contributing to. There appear to be two interpretations of this in relation to public services -one that looks at the co-production of services, and another that focuses on co-production of outcomes or benefits -but other researchers also focus on co-production of knowledge (Edelenbos et al, 2011) and co-production of research (Beebeejaun et al, 2014). This first split between coproduction of services or outcomes is evident in the evolution of Bovaird's work in particular.…”